Top 10 self-defense killings
Sunday's shooting of an intruder in a Baltimore County home in Perry Hall is a reminder that people in Baltimore and in the suburbs sometimes use deadly force to protect themselves. But police and prosecutors don't always agree on how to proceed.
I pulled a list of what I think are the Top 10 self-defense cases -- most involve shootings, but who can forget one of the most recent, a Johns Hopkins student and his samurai sword? In most cases, prosecutors ruled the incidents justified. But sometimes they prosecuted, only to get a conviction that carried a lenient sentence or an outright acquittal.
I purposely didn't include domestic cases, where one spouse shoots or attacks an abusive spouse. That got a bit complicated and didn't fit the current scenario. But we do have a variety of cases, from homeowners and business owners surprised by gunmen in robberies to elderly men shooting at children for vandalizing cars.
As you can see, the cases are never totally clear-cut. In some cases, the property owners were criticized for laying in wait for burglars, raising the specter of vigilante justice. I'd love he hear your thoughts, and any cases I might've missed.
Read the list and judge for yourselves:
September 2009 — Johns Hopkins chemistry student John Pontolillo kills an unarmed intruder with a samurai sword. Prosecutors rule the killing near the North Baltimore campus justified. Police had earlier visited Pontolillo’s house and alerted the residents to a suspicious prowler. The student joined police and security on a quick search but found nothing. Later, before going to bed, Pontolillo went out again, this time armed, and confronted the prowler near a garage. He told police he swung when he was backed up against a door and feared for his lift.
March 2001 — Brothers Dominic “Tony” Geckle and Matthew Geckle shot three unarmed intruders at their concrete plant in Glyndon. Both had armed themselves with shotguns and spent the night in an unlighted warehouse after break-ins the two previous shifts. A grand jury declined to indict the men.
June 2001 — Two businessmen frustrated by repeated burglaries at their East Baltimore warehouse shot and killed a drug addict who broke inside and who they said appeared to be armed. Baltimore prosecutors charged Kenny Der and Darrell R. Kifer with first-degree murder because they laid in wait and shot the man several times with a shotgun and a handgun. Defense attorneys argued that the case “challenged the foundation of the right to defend yourself” and a judge in 2003 acquitted them of all charges.
1979 — Roman George Welzant shot and killed an 18-year-old boy and wounded another after they threw snowballs at his home in Eastwood. A Baltimore County jury acquitted the 68-year-old of murder. Known as a neat-freak, Welzant took photographs of kids who were drinking and the boy he killed had been drunk at the time.
October 1994 — Nathaniel Hurt, who ran a snowball stand behind his rowhouse on East North Avenue, kills a 13-year-old boy when he shot at youths vandalizing his car. The case drew sympathy for Hurt, a retired steel worker, and made him synonymous with vigilante justice in a case that became a referendum on out-of-control youths. He was convicted of involuntary manslaughter and sentenced to vie years in prison, but Gov. Parris N. Glendening commuted his sentence after 14 months.
July 1998 — In a case eerily similar to that of Nathaniel Hurt, and one that attracted equal sympathy, 78-year-old Albert Simms shot and killed a 15-year-old boy who had thrown a brick at his Cadillac on Llewelyn Avenue in East Baltimore. Simms was found incompetent to stand trial.
March 2010 — William Bozman wakes up in his Perry Hall bedroom to find a convicted felon standing over him with a handgun and demanding money. The 68-year-old towing company owner someone gets his own gun and fatally shoots the gunmen when he refused to put down the weapon, according to his account to police.
August 2009 — A clerk at a Broadway vintage clothing store in Fells Point, along with her boyfriend, whacked a man with a baseball bat after he returned to the store for the third time to rob it. Police later arrested the man and said he was responsible for 17 robberies of city businesses in 22 days. The boyfriend, Mike Voorhis, said he hit the man on the head three of four times before he ran away. Other merchants, also repeated targets, had armed themselves with bats, knives and in one case, an ax. Police arrested the man before he was beaten again.
September 1997 — A Northeast Baltimore liquor store owners shoots and kills a robber as they struggled for a gun during a holdup. It was the second time that Sung Kim, 33, owner of Bay City Liquors, shot and killed a man who tried to hold him up. Both shootings were ruled justified.
December 2009 — Two men were charged with attempted first-degree murder after they wrested away an Uzi-style machine gun from a man who had just shot their friend in the head during a party at a downtown hotel on Fayette Street. Prosecutors said the men went too far by continuing to beat the suspected shooter long after they had him in control and he no longer posed a threat. The case is still pending, but defense lawyers complained it demonstrates a double-standard in justice because the Hopkins student was not charged.
Comments
"Top" ten? That makes this sound like a "best of" list. And while I agree that self-defense is legitimate, it doesn't make the instances any less unfortunate, for both the intruder and the person who had to kill them. What's next, a list of top ten rapes? I realize the media is contending with a generation who obtains their news from the Daily Show, but to sensationalize self-defense killings by putting them in a Letterman style "top ten" format goes a little over the top, don't you think?
Posted by: Jack | March 31, 2010 8:51 AM
Like the prosecutors, I had a problem with the two "lying in wait" business incidents, and the two men who shot auto vandals. Self-defense (which includes a business where the staff is personally confronted), and defense of a third party is quite different from defense of property.
Posted by: City Redux | March 31, 2010 9:24 AM
'Top Ten' is a term not necessarily a compliment. It goes without saying that the list is nothing to rejoice over. I can recall each incident, but there are those who because of age or other reasons may not be aware of these facts. No one is applauding anyone involved in the list above.
Posted by: ruth | March 31, 2010 11:57 AM
OK, so,...
since the police department is being downsized,....
who is supposed to defend your property ?????
Posted by: galt | March 31, 2010 12:32 PM
Vigilantism is an affront to any civilized society. It must be dealt with harshly and swiftly. I am sickened by the glorification that many readers seem to get out of the cold blooded murder of another human being. The man in Perry Hall is a murderer and belongs in prison, just like Pontolillo.
I can't help but notice the racist overtones many people seem to have about how 'great' it is when a white person murders a black person. The Hopkins case is a perfect example of this. To applaud the butchering and slaughter of an unarmed man is disgraceful. Regardless of the situation he deserved better than to be hacked to death like some kind of animal.
Posted by: Leroy | March 31, 2010 12:33 PM
Leroy- So you're saying that the individual in Perry Hall, who was in his own home, had no right to defend himself against an armed intruder? So he should wait to be shot and killed for him to obtain justice? Please look up the Castle Doctrine so that the next time you post you don't sound like a moron. Additionally, I fail to see any racist overtones on any of these comments, it doesn't matter what color you are, or what color the INTRUDER is, you have the right to protect yourself.
While I condone gun violence on a whole, everyone should have the absolute right to defend themselves within the confines of their home or business.
Posted by: Brandon | March 31, 2010 1:17 PM
@Brandon: You condone gun violence on a whole? I hope you mean you condemn gun violence.
@Jack and Ruth: I think when Mr. Hermann used the term 'Top Ten,' he was most certainly referring to the ten most publicized, scrutinized, or popular stories of such instances and not in any way saying that these killings were good things or even the correct action. Get over the format.
Posted by: PW | March 31, 2010 1:38 PM
Leroy:
The man in Perry Hall was menaced by a thug with a gun, and you think he belongs in jail for defending himself? You're as repulsive as people who tell rape victims to try to enjoy it rather than resisting, and your race-baiting shows that you're a racist as well.
Posted by: Pascal Patin | March 31, 2010 5:37 PM
Vigilantism is when someone goes out and takes the law into their own hands. Not one of these examples is vigilantism. Each was the act of defending themselves or their property which is something that our forefathers were very much in favor of. Until criminals start to get the idea that when they rob or attack someone it may very well cost them their lives, then the crime will not end. I applaud each and everyone of these heroes.It is way too simplistic to turn it into a race issue. It is a crime issue and personally I feel that anyone that is willing to rob another deserves anything they get. I don't want to glorify it, but I do applaud it.
Anyone bothered by it should be far more outraged by the glorification of criminals in every movie, tv show, video game and music video.
Leroy claims racist overtones but ignores the fact that all of the criminals were black while those defending themselves were black, white and Asian. Were the victims being targeted because of their race?
Posted by: John | April 1, 2010 12:11 PM
Leroy,
I hope it's not about a white turning the tables on a black intruder for you. Drop the colors and the correct sentiment should be what is the true sentiment. I am white and was totally relieved when a white beach boy-like drug addict was finally captured after robbing a number of homes in East Baltimore. Turns out, he was a neighbor just a few hundred feet away. He later confessed to over 120 thefts in the previous 6 months .. pretty busy guy. It's not a color issue but a socio-economic one usually with a strong drug influence.
Posted by: Grega | April 1, 2010 11:35 PM
galt
Vigilantism is an affront civilized society. The man in Perry Hall was defending himself in his own home. Break into anyone's house at 0-dark-thirty and you always have accepted any and all inherent risks involved with criminal activity.
As to the racist overtones - I just don't see them. I didn't see race mentioned. Perhaps you could show me what I am overlooking.
I can tell you this: break into my home with a gun and place me in fear of my life or the lives of my family, and I would not check the race of the threat before taking appropriate action.
In view of your position, I hope you identify yourself in the event you are being robbed, raped or beaten, so that persons like my self don't violate your rights by using force when coming to your aid.
We'll simply give the offender a stern talking to and some disapproving looks.
Posted by: Maryland_Shooter | April 8, 2010 7:50 AM
Let's review Mr Cook's record for just a moment, shall we. It seems that he didn't leave Honors English to enter a sudden life of crime:
03/30/1985 Robbery (Probation)
10/08/1985 VIOLATION OF PROBATION
07/11/1988 Robbing people with a starter pistol - 1 month served
11/21/1991 CDS
10/01/1992 CDS - served one day
05/07/1993 CDS & VIOLATION OF PROBATION
08/16/1994 ASSAULT-W/INTENT MURDER
BATTERY
HANDGUN ON PERSON
HANDGUN USE IN COMMIT CRIME
FIREARMS:UNLAWFUL DISCHARGE
11/23/2003 CDS served like 4 days
11/26/2009 CDS & Burglary
11/25/2009 CDS Pending case
So here we have a guy we know has a gun, we know will use it and yet some of you think the homeowner should have done . . . what exactly?
Look at the facts, the guy was a dirt bag and society is better off without folks like that. If that sounds harsh - wake up people.
These kind would kill you for what you are wearing and think nothing of it.
I do think the bigger question for all of us is:
Why was this guy on the street? Looks to me like lawmakers have abdicated their duty to protect the public.
Posted by: Maryland_Shooter | April 8, 2010 8:10 AM
I have no sympathy for those perpetrating crimes against innocent citizens, but it seems getting prosecuted depends on the state. In Texas you may protect your life and your property, meaning if someone is stealing your tires, you have the right to use force. In California, you might as well get a lug wrench to assist the thief. If you should hurt him, he will sue. If you hurt him badly, or kill him, you will go to prison.
Just recently, a man in San Marcos, hearing a noise in his house, grabbed a pistol and shot 3 teens, two of which had BB pistols. It was the middle of the night and anyway, two were killed. No charges were brought. I believe there is a lesson here.
Posted by: james larson | September 1, 2010 5:09 AM